Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
About the Casebook

 Search:
 

Join the Chat Room!

Where do we go from here Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Message Boards » General Discussion » Where do we go from here « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn

Post Number: 1131
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 3:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi,
I have been on this fabulous site for about four years[old format and new].
The question is 'Where do we go from here'?.
It seems to me we have four main suspects ie.
Tumblety.
A most eccentric individual, that had a long history of involvement in weird goings on, and was certainly in Whitechapel at the time of kellys murder.
Joseph Barnett [ bias] that had a motive and the opportunety to kill Kelly.
Sickert.
A impressionist painter of reknown that was fascinated in murder, and has recently been shown to have possibly wrote at least one Ripper letter.
and circumstancial evidence could point to his painting 'A passing Funeral' as a strong point towards his guilt.
M Druitt.
Found drowned in the Thames a few weeks after Kellys death, His description fits Whites[ Ds] perfectly, and that of Thomas Bowers sighting of a man seen with Kelly on the wed before her death.
Obviously Mr unknown is a suspect, also a certified unnamed correctly indentified polish jew, but that evidence is extremely vague.
Of all the evidence to date. i feel we should concentate only on.
Tumblety.
Barnett.
Sickert.
Druitt.
All of these are /and have strong pointers towards guilt.
Regards Richard.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna

Post Number: 2266
Registered: 8-2003
Posted on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 4:22 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Richard,

Where do we go from here?
To the nearest PUB, of course!!!!!!!


Seriously...
I am not sure.
I would rather replace Sickert (for whom there are no evidence -- or even signs of guilt -- whatsoever) with
Mr Unknown Barber/Butcher/Polish immigrant.

Sickert should never be on that list to begin with.
The others I am willing to discuss.

All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn

Post Number: 1228
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 4:39 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Richard,I have just posted some stuff on the "shades of Whitechapel" thread about the pointers Britain"s leading psychological profiler gave to the police that relate to the new suspect in the Wimbledon Common Murder.
To my mind they seem to have relevance to the Jack the Ripper case since the killer seems to have finished his murder spree in a room[he had craftily gained access to through lying]and where he carried out mutilations so gross they gave the police photographer a nervous breakdown[or similar].
These pointers strongly advise on an "escalating offender"-and someone who would not be able to stop unless dtained or dead.
Also someone who would have committed a string of minor offences escalating as time went by to more major offences until he began to kill.

Most interestingly he points to police having "discussed" such a man locally and whose neighbours had noticed strange things about and informed on[as in the case of "leather apron"?-was that Ostrog?]
In all this current leading profiler describes someone whose activities have already aroused police suspicion.
Well certainly Tumblety fits the bill and possibly Druitt who was deceased by the end of 1888 but who Machnaughten claims to have destroyed all evidence on.But I wonder does Barnett-maybe he could have been the killer of Mary Kelly maybe but Jack the Ripper?As for Sickert well he lived on until 1942 and was never seriously considered as a suspect until 1970.If you go by current psychological profiling consensus it wasnt Sickert since he doesnt fit any of the criterion.He was never on their records,noone seems to have suspected him at the time and he didnt commit similar "escalating" murders[ that anyone knows anything about anyway].He may still be a suspect but it seems very unlikely to me.The man who mutilates in the way the ripper did seems to most of the profilers I have read up on to have suffered from the psychotic disorder of paranoid schizophrenia.
Anyway,what about Cutbush?
Best Wishes Natalie
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert

Post Number: 3453
Registered: 3-2003
Posted on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 4:49 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Natalie

Is it true that the latest suspect for the Wimbledon murder had a father who went to Australia wehen he was young?

Richard, I thought your thread was going to discuss a deep philosophical question, from its title.

Robert
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna

Post Number: 2267
Registered: 8-2003
Posted on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 4:49 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Natalie,

As you may know, I agree on your thoughts regarding Barnett; I hardly think he could be Jack the Ripper, although I can't rule him out as the murderer of Mary Kelly.

As far as Cutbush is concerned, I think he could fit the psychological bill, that unfortunately we don't know that much about him, and it's hard to draw any conclusions regarding his guilt when he have so little information (which really goes for the "unknown polish whatever" as well). That is the trick.

All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder

Post Number: 358
Registered: 4-2004
Posted on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 9:01 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Richard,

If we're looking for an answer to where we should go from here, I think it's way too early to only concentrate on four suspects and ignore all others. And I'm sure only a minor percentage of people here would agree that those four suspects are the top four anyway.

But then you can choose how you use your time while others either focus on their own suspects or, like what I've decided to do, look at the case and surrounding history and legends in general to see what it has to tell us about people in general and the Victorian age in particular.

Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon

Post Number: 380
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 1:01 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Richard.
One particular source which has not been fully tapped, assuming we want to go anywhere from here, is the newspaper library at Colindale.
A tremendous amount of work has already been done at Colindale towards finding Ripper related articles, but not for articles say between 1880-1888, which may offer an insight into activities of persons who only later may have become involved in the Whitechapel crimes.
This of course is assuming our 'Jack' has a previous criminal record.

Also articles from this same period which report police activities and procedures, year-end reports & statistics, etc. which would help us understand how the police functioned more accurately.

Although one central attraction to the Ripper case has always been the selection & justification of a suspect, I do think that this possibly inevitable circumstance has a price. And that price is quite often the loss of objectivity on behalf of the holder of that belief.
In short, when one selects a suspect, it becomes apparent that this person then feels required to view all evidence/suggestions from the perspective of how it relates to his/her suspect. And if any particular suggestion reflects negatively then it is rejected. I see this defence mechanism kick in on almost every thread in some fashion or other, consequently the same old discussions occur and re-occur time and time again. Unfortunately, I think there's alot of wheel-spinning.

I guess I am one of the few members who tends to disappear for several months at a time, only to return to find very little change but the same old discussions still taking place.
I don't know if Richard has noticed the same problem, maybe this is a partial reason for the question in the first place.
If not, then, well as for the suspects, Tumblety, Sickert, Barnett & Druitt, I am not impressed by either and Sickert shouldn't even be there.
Barnett may have had a hand in Kelly's murder, either him or Joe Flemming.
Tumblety's only crime may have been to unwhitingly set certain wheels in motion, but not as the actual perpetrator. Druitt was a sad victim in his own right but not a good Ripper suspect.
But then, there are alot worse suspects than those last three.

What direction is taken from here?, well, only a few can really run with the ball, and the direction in my opinion is more focused research.
Sadly, not all of us can help.

A Great bunch of people who have made a terrific site and provided a suitable mix of serious research & amusing interactions.

All the best, Jon

We talk of things as wrong or right, or clear as night and day.
But life is rarely black and white, but multiple shades of grey.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

NC
Unregistered guest
Posted on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 9:00 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Richard et al,

I think your reasoning is sound except for the ever controversial Mr Sickert. If you're compiling a list of the top four I'd replace Sickert with Hutchinson for the simple reason that we can be reasonably certain in placing him at the crime scene at the time of one of the murders. Although this evidence is circumstantial it far outweighs the tenuous links to the crimes proposed for Sickert.

Although no one can reasonably claim Hutchinson as definitely being JtR without some direct evidence of motive or victim connection he stays high on my list until clear evidence to the contrary arises.

Neale
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Maria Giordano
Detective Sergeant
Username: Mariag

Post Number: 121
Registered: 4-2004
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 10:58 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi, Richard--

just a quick peek in but I'd eliminate Sickert entiely and move the Unknown Polish Jew to the top of the list. Personally, Joe is near the bottom for me.
Mags
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert W. House
Detective Sergeant
Username: Robhouse

Post Number: 113
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 12:21 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I think some might disagree, but I think that there are still some avenues open for research which might end up being profitable. However, I do not (personally) think that this applies to all the suspects, and in fact, I think that it would be more beneficial to research some of the lesser known suspects...

For example Arbie LaBruckman: little is really known about Arbie LaBruckman, although he was charged in a similar case in NYC, he was presumably arrested in regards to the JTR case in London, and he worked as a slaughterman on cattleboats that went back and forth between London and New York. At one point, research was being done to see if there were crew lists which might show if LaBruckman was in London during the relevant dates. I believe that this research hit a sort of dead end, but as far as I know, there is a good chance that these records actually exist somewhere (Nova Scotia?) If it could be proved that LaBruckman was actually in London for the dates of the murders, then he would (in my opinion) skyrocket to the top of the list. He was also said to have been a very rough character, and also possibly fit various descriptions of the murderer.

I do not write this to argue in favor of LaBruckman, per se, but rather to illustrate the point that there are still avenues of research which could yield important results. Also, I would like to point out that LaBruckman, although he is a lesser known suspect, has (so to speak) no points against him as a suspect in the case. In other words, yes, he is lesser known in the case, but there are no known facts which eliminate him as a suspect.

Although the 4 suspects listed above are more celebrated and more discussed, they all have major points against them, and I personally do not think they are very good candidates. In my opinion, research into these suspects will go nowhere, and it is just flogging a dead horse. It is time to look elsewhere.

Also, we still have my favorite suspect Kosminski, but I wont go into that topic except to say that there are still avenues of research open in that department also.

Rob House
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna

Post Number: 2273
Registered: 8-2003
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 12:44 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

For once Rob and I seem to be in agreement.

I'd say LaBruckman would be interesting to get into -- Bury, I think, is another one.

And I'd say the "Kosminski"-like character (the paranoid schizofrenic unknown) is still among the most suitable suspects to date as well.

The problem with the rather known suspects Richard points out above is that we know quite a lot about them, and still they don't seem to get us anywhere.
It is probably so, that the future in Ripperology lies in the study of those that still are not that well investigated, but that depends on how much more new information about them that will be discovered and revealed.

All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon

Post Number: 382
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 1:02 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

"If it could be proved that LaBruckman was actually in London for the dates of the murders, then he would (in my opinion) skyrocket to the top of the list."

Robert.
I'm sure you didn't mean it the way it came across, but unless anyone can be placed in London during the time of the murders then they simply do not even make the list.
Being in London is the first prerequisit of any suspect, it does not elevate them in any way.

If Mr LaBruckman cannot be placed in London he simply is not a suspect - period.

Regards, Jon
We talk of things as wrong or right, or clear as night and day.
But life is rarely black and white, but multiple shades of grey.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Diana
Inspector
Username: Diana

Post Number: 346
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 1:58 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I think we should start with the evidence, not with the list of suspects. We should let the evidence carry us where it will. If it is possible to solve it, it will happen one of three ways 1) new and unheard of technology opens doors 2) "lost" evidence is found 3) somebody thinks of a new way to look at the evidence we already have. We'll have to leave # 1 to the scientists, # 2 is being carried out by a number of us. I like Ebay watch and I hope the interview with Reg Hutchinson turns up. I know there is ongoing research into the seaside home. #3 is being carried on in the message boards every day as we ricochet ideas off each other.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert W. House
Detective Sergeant
Username: Robhouse

Post Number: 114
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 2:28 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Jon,

I would argue that LaBruckman is as good as suspect as any of the other 4 mentioned. In fact it is clear that he was in and out of London frequently during this period, as he worked on boats that went back and forth between London and New York, but it is not known what specific dates he was there.

In any case, I dont agree with your assessment anyways, because unlike any of these other 4, LaBruckman has other things that counterbalance this deficiency: ie. a known disposition for violence, he worked in a job as a butcher, was supposedly arrested in connection with the JTR case, was a suspect in the (very similar) Carrie Brown murder case in New York, fits the description/ age basically, was a foreigner, etc.

It is known that he was in London frequently for days at a time. I repeat: if it could be shown that he was in London on the specific dates of the murders, he would be one of the top suspects. AND this is a piece of research that can still be looked into and possibly figured out.

I stand by my statement.

Also, these other 4, there are two who were in all likelihood NOT in London during (at least some of) the murder dates, ie. Sickert (France) and Druitt (playing Crickett). So are you saying now that if we cannot prove that a person was in London during all the murder dates, then he is not a suspect?

That doesnt make any sense.

And this gets back to my main point, that there is still research to be done... and in the case of this particular suspect (LaBruckman) IF SAID EVIDENCE WAS FOUND, it would show pretty definitively whether he is or is not JTR. So that would be a step forward either way.

RH

(Message edited by robhouse on November 15, 2004)

(Message edited by robhouse on November 15, 2004)
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg

Post Number: 1269
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 3:26 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi
with so many suspects to exonerate we will be here for a long time yet!!

Jenni
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lindsey Millar
Detective Sergeant
Username: Lindsey

Post Number: 55
Registered: 9-2004
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 6:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Guys..

Why don't we look into LaBruckman a little more closely.. As Robert says, he's as good a suspect as any... (not at all swayed by that gorgeous pic of him smoking a cigarette!)

Bestest,

Lyn
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Diana
Inspector
Username: Diana

Post Number: 350
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 8:11 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

What pic are you talking about. Is there something I've missed? (Given his personality, whether he was Jack or not I do not consider him "gorgeous". Beauty is as beauty does!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon

Post Number: 383
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 8:53 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Diana, I think Lyn was talking about Robert..
tick....tick...tick...



Robert said..
"So are you saying now that if we cannot prove that a person was in London during all the murder dates, then he is not a suspect?"

No Robert, not all, - any.

Regards, Jon

We talk of things as wrong or right, or clear as night and day.
But life is rarely black and white, but multiple shades of grey.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Lindsey Millar
Detective Sergeant
Username: Lindsey

Post Number: 58
Registered: 9-2004
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 9:26 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Yes, Diana,

I was talking about Robert House's pic. Sorry for the confusion!

Bestest,

Lyn
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Alan Sharp
Chief Inspector
Username: Ash

Post Number: 672
Registered: 9-2003
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 9:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hmmm, don't know where I'm going from here, but I don't think this is it.

Okay, so we have to concentrate only on these four suspects. Here we go.

Barnett - not a chance in hell. That's that one done.
Sickert - unless Stan comes up with some new reason to suspect him, pretty much a dead duck.
Druitt - apart from MacNaughton and dying at the right moment, nothing whatsoever to connect him to Whitechapel or the crimes.
Tumblety - well at least some basis for suspicion here, but too tall, too flamboyant, too distinctive, doesn't fit any of the witness descriptions in any way at all.

Okay, finished concentrating only on them. Can I get on with something more productive now?
"Everyone else my age is an adult, whereas I am merely in disguise."
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz

Post Number: 1306
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - 4:33 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I'm with Alan all the way on this one.

And I'm like the guy who, when asked for directions, says cheerfully, "Well, if I were you, I wouldn't start from here".

Love,

Caz
X
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert W. House
Detective Sergeant
Username: Robhouse

Post Number: 115
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - 8:53 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hey Ladies!

Thanks for the compliments on that photo... sad to say, that was taken a few years ago and I am much uglier now. So dont let that sway your comments in any way.

OK, Alan, I am in agreement. Now, what about LaBruckman? Is there anyone on these boards who is anywhere near Halifax Nova Scotia? I think there are some records at an Institute of Maritime History or something like that... I can look into my notes if anyone wants.

Also, I am sorry to keep sidetracking this discussion into a "suspect-focused" forum, but what about Kosminski? Did you guys read the dissertation I posted on him?

http://roberthouse.com/aaron1.html

I dont think that he can be so easily eliminated, especially if were accertained that he is indeed the "Anderson suspect"... i.e. the polish jew.

I am of the opinion (as is scott nelson also I think) that research into his geneaology might be profitable.

On another note, I am going to be visiting London for the next 2 weeks, so if anyone has any concrete ideas for "research" I can accomplish while I am there, please let me know.

RH
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

NC
Unregistered guest
Posted on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 8:21 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Lyn & Robert,

Agree with you re. LaBruckman. Would love to know more about him - especially any activities in London.

More generally, I think we need more evidence. There must be police documents, personal memoirs, letters etc. which maybe lying in dusty attics or in personal collections. Hopefully people will recognize the importance of what they have and and make it available. Unfortunately I suspect anything like this will pop up on eBay with a rediculous price tag.

Neale
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Joan O'Liari
Unregistered guest
Posted on Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - 8:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Robert;
My kids live in Halifax, so what would they be looking for exactly? I will be heading there for Christmas shopping soon. Let me know if there is anything we can do to help.
Joan
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Peter J. Tabord
Unregistered guest
Posted on Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - 6:59 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Surely this points at the heart of the problem with 'ripperology'? There are several well known suspects (I'd add Maybrick) who in all probability shouldn't be suspects at all, but survive and indeed dominate discussion due to the difficulties of proving a negative. (It is all very well to talk about proving people are or are not in London, but extremely difficult to do so conclusively - you'd have thought Eddie, Cream, Druitt, Sickert, Deeming, etc, were already dealt with under this heading. At least Joe was actually there!)

I'm not having a go at any of the adherents to these suspects - I was myself a Tumbletonian for a while - but the arguments concerning them are rehashed time and again, a great deal of bandwidth is taken up, and at the end of the day little emerges that is conclusive.

I have said on another thread that I now doubt that the case can be solved, or contrarywise, that anyone can be totally exonerated to the satisfaction of everybody. So what progress can be made? Only trying to find out more, in the hope that something relevant comes to light. IOW, what we need is research for the sake of research, not research focussed on preconcieved ideas of 'proof' regarding a particular suspect. In short, we need more information - we are spinning our wheels for lack of data.

Regards

Pete
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek

Post Number: 632
Registered: 5-2003
Posted on Thursday, November 18, 2004 - 12:35 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I, for one, would like to see more research on Druitt. I am amazed at what we do not know about him. Only recently I saw for the first time that he was involved in court sessions during the week before his disappearance. I think there may be a lot more information to be mined regarding him.

Andy S.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert

Post Number: 3502
Registered: 3-2003
Posted on Thursday, November 18, 2004 - 6:39 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Andy

You never know, the inquest papers may turn up. Or, more realistically, a full and coherent account of the inquest may one day be discovered in some obscure local newspaper.

As you say, we have made some progress e.g. the court sessions you mention. Or, as another example, we now know who J.T. Homer was, thanks to Mr Whyman.

Robert
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek

Post Number: 635
Registered: 5-2003
Posted on Wednesday, November 24, 2004 - 11:06 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Robert,

Actually, the find I would most like to see regarding Druitt would be old legers from Valentine's school indicating the date on which the checks found on Druitt's body were written. I believe this is crucial information. Unfortunately, the chances of such old legers turning up in someone's attic are rather slim. Perhaps some news report will be discovered indicating this date.

Andy S.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert

Post Number: 3542
Registered: 3-2003
Posted on Wednesday, November 24, 2004 - 12:47 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Andy

Alternatively, since the cheques would have formed part of Monty's estate and at some point would have had to be paid in by William, maybe somewhere there are some dusty old bank records which mention the date. An inquest report would be our best bet, though.

Similarly I have wondered whether we could discover which policemen were staying at the Seaside Home, from records of cheques paid into the local banks. But the chances of such records surviving are practically nil.

Robert
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek

Post Number: 636
Registered: 5-2003
Posted on Wednesday, November 24, 2004 - 2:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Robert,

that raises an interesting question: whether Monty had sufficient assets to have an "estate" worthy of generating records that might yet survive.

Andy S.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert

Post Number: 3545
Registered: 3-2003
Posted on Wednesday, November 24, 2004 - 4:39 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hi Andy

I think I've read somewhere that Monty left everything to William. I must say, I've never actually seen his will reproduced in a book. But I suppose that, as a careful lawyer, Monty would have made a will. It would be interesting to get a look at it, if he did.

Robert
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Diana
Inspector
Username: Diana

Post Number: 364
Registered: 2-2003
Posted on Thursday, November 25, 2004 - 10:50 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Since none of the primary evidence exists any more, the best thing we can do is argue and debate and jaw and theorize until we think of something that is checkable, like Monty's will at Somerset house.

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Register now! Administration

Use of these message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use. The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping. The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements. You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.